That's the problem with present phonetics (IPA SAMPA). Not computer friendly. Not English friendly as well. So folks use no-name-spell as a work around. Linguists are not enamored of no-name-spell so they haven't named it.

Some of us used to use IPA on this board until some change in the software disabled the use of Unicode. I try not to use ad hoc phonetic orthographies because the cause more trouble than they're worth. The problem I have with English-based transcription systems is that they promote weird pronunciations of vowels and consonants that differ from most other languages that use the Latin alphabet. In instances where Unicode IPA is not avilable, I use SAMPA and it works well for me. A third choice would be to name the characters. (I've seen this done in ASCII-only forums where spelling using non-Latin alphabets, e.g., Hebrew). As tsuwm demonstrated, one can talk about schwas without getting the glyph to render on one's screen.

(As always, when such like is discussed, I offer the observation that a reform of English orthography is very likely not to occur in our lifetimes.)

Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site.
Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to
hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.